Community‐based restorative transitional justice in Sierra Leone

Community‐based restorative transitional justice is an important feature of peace consolidation, maximizing access to justice and facilitating reconciliation. Examining post‐conflict Sierra Leone as a case study, the author draws on existing justice practices in Sierra Leone as examples of restorative responses to war criminality. Specifically, the traditional reintegration of former male and female combatants and the emergence of a new project, ‘Fambul Tok’ are detailed. The author discusses and compares the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to point to gaps in transitional justice that call for community‐based restorative strategies.     

Victims and the restorative justice ambition: a London case study of potentials,assumptions and realities

Restorative justice is coming out of the shadows and in Europe this interest grows alongside a stronger victims’ movement with a domino effect on EU member states’ laws. In the UK, legislation now allows restorative justice at all stages of the criminal justice system, and as part of these developments, new restorative justice services that will be ‘victim-led’ are being funded. This paper questions this ‘kind’ of restorative justice, using unpublished findings from a research project that was conducted in 2017 in London. The project involved a survey with 66 victims and 44 offenders, followed by 11 in-depth victim interviews and a focus groups with 7 victims and practitioners. The data point out a number of assumptions and caveats, which must be addressed in order to ensure that further investment in restorative justice will yield benefits to all those whose lives are blighted by crime. The conclusions are relevant to anyone practising restorative justice internationally including policy makers and funders.     

Immature offenders. A critical history of the representations of the offender in restorative justice

This paper reconstructs and discusses how the ‘offender’ is represented within policy documents, legal statutes and scholarly literature on restorative justice, published and circulated in England and Wales over the last thirty years. The research first outlines the most wide-ranging and recurrent images and implicit assumptions of the offender in restorative justice. A set of specific offender’s features will be singled out, and the ‘ideal offender’ of restorative justice will be profiled. The final step of this work consists of mapping out the cultural context within which this ideal has emerged, in a historical perspective. The overall goal is to shed light on some taken-for-granted images surrounding the offender in restorative justice, and on the cultural context within which they have developed. In this way, it is possible to contribute toward the critical re-assessment of restorative justice whilst considering implications beyond the British context.     

‘AlterNative’ approaches to criminal justice: John Braithwaite’s theory of reintegrative shaming revisited

Conservative crime control measures, such as incarceration, capital punishment, and boot camps, have done little, if anything, to prevent and control crime in North America and elsewhere. What, then, is to be done? Like other progressive criminologists, I contend that we need to radically rethink the administration of justice and seek insight from First Nations societies and communities that rely on informal means of resolving a wide range of conflicts. The main objective of this essay is to demonstrate that such ‘AlterNative’ social control strategies are more effective and humane means of curbing crime and achieving social justice. The progressive initiatives proposed here are heavily informed by the Inuit model of restorative justice and John Braitwaite’s theory of reintegrative shaming. These have the potential to alleviate much pain and suffering caused by crime and other symptoms of structured social inequality.     

Is restorative justice for sexual crime compatible with various criminal justice systems?

In addition to the more conventional approaches of the criminal justice system, this article suggests that there is a need for restorative justice as another method of addressing sexual crime. In support of this view, the present article explores the possibility of a hybrid justice system based on a complementary relationship between restorative justice and the criminal justice system. An analysis of the limits of the criminal justice system and the need for restorative justice in the contentious area of sexual crime will be followed by a detailed examination of key justice considerations when trying to marry both criminal justice and restorative justice perspectives. Such considerations include: the meaning of justice; legislation; sentencing principles; due process; victims’ rights; and the location of restorative justice within/alongside/outside the criminal justice system. The aim of this article is to determine whether it is possible to reconcile two seemingly juxtaposed methods of justice delivery in the context of sexual crime in order to create a hybrid system of justice that best protects and responds to the rights and needs of victims and offenders.     

Regenerative justice,beyond restoring

This paper outlines a new form of justice, called regenerative justice. Regenerative justice is the coupling of restorative justice with the notion of generative justice, which involves the explicit and intentional discovery and building of life meanings, as well as the consideration of the relationships that those meanings have with wrongdoing and ‘making things right’. This exploration comes about after first considering restorative justice, then providing a critique that uncovers potential blind spots in restorative practice. Logotherapeutic techniques, including: Socratic dialogue, attitude modulation, and dereflection, are used by therapists to help people discover meaning and purpose and have successfully assisted crime victims and offenders. Borrowing from these techniques and specific questioning approaches, restorative dialogue facilitators can enhance restorative practice, particularly in the phases of preparation for restorative dialogue and follow-up after restorative dialogue, by deliberately emphasizing meaning-building discussions (generative justice). Therefore, regenerative justice synthesizes the restoration of people and relationships with the generation of peaceful and healing meanings that can help stakeholders in wrongdoing make sense out of suffering and move forward with a sense of purpose. An example of this process is illustrated in a victim-offender dialogue in a crime of severe violence, where meaning-building can be particularly powerful.     

Restorative Justice in India

‘Restorative Justice’ reflects a crimino-victim balanced justice system where equal justice to offenders and victims is ensured. There are four potent features of Restorative Justice: repair, restore, reconcile, and reintegrate the offenders and victims to each other and to their shared environments and communities. There are many examples within Indian criminological literature that thoroughly explain the practice of restorative justice in India. The kings who ruled in various parts of the country had practiced restorative justice in a well thought out and traditional manner. Much of Gandhian philosophy and practice is based on restorative justice principles including the participatory practices of fairness and equality. Though there is a limited amount of literature on the present restorative justice practices available in India, this paper attempts to explain restorative justice practices across the continent from the view point of society and legal provision.     

<Emphasis Type="Italic">Communities at Large</Emphasis>: An Archaeological Analysis of the ‘Community’ Within Restorative Justice Policy and Laws

Within the scholarly literature on restorative justice, the ‘community’, as a distinctive crime stakeholder, has been the target of extensive research. This work provides an original interpretation of the underlying images of the community within policy documents and legal statutes on RJ produced in England and Wales since 1985. The paper begins with an outline of the most recurrent representations of the community in relevant laws and policy, unearthing their theoretical underpinnings. The next step aims to infer from the general representations a range of more specific features, and to sketch out an ‘ideal’ model of community in restorative justice, whose cultural background is also outlined. As a final step, some critical reflections on the implications of the ‘ideal community’ are offered. By identifying what is taken for granted in laws and policies on restorative justice and its cultural context, this study aims to foster a critical “reality check” on this specific development of western penal policy, relevant for the restorative justice movement, at the international level.     

Ten Years On, the ‘Three Circle’ Model of Restorative & Transformative Justice: A Tool to Combat Victimization and Recidivism

This paper had its genesis 10 years ago in the authors’ development of a communitarian ‘three circle’ model of restorative and transformative justice for a pilot restorative justice study used with serious and repeat adult offenders appearing in the Magistrates’ Courts in Western Australia. The model was designed in part to place their crimes within a context, something that rarely occurs within the mainstream adversarial criminal justice system in Australia. The model was primarily designed to provide victims of crime with the best outcome and offenders with the opportunity to provide apology and restitution, as well as take responsibility for their actions. The three circles, each including two facilitators, are: Circle 1: consists of the perpetrator who has pleaded guilty to a specified criminal act together with his/her family and/or friends; Circle 2: consists of the victim(s) of the crime together with their family and/or friends. Circle 3: consists of a combination of the first two circles, tasked to seek, if possible, a mutually agreeable resolution that culminates in a report to present to the Magistrate in court to use in mitigation of sentencing. Importantly, although the 30-month study had socially and economically significant results, 10 years after its completion there is still no restorative justice program in the adult courts in Western Australia. Because of this, the authors also set out to question the state government’s motivation in largely ignoring this successful process.     

Frenemies: restorative justice and customary mechanisms of justice

More often than not, restorative justice is said to take roots in Indigenous practices. In fact, Indigenous and other traditional mechanisms of justice are often described as examples of restorative justice practices. In New Zealand, the government equates the Mãori approach to doing justice with family group conferences (FGC); a restorative justice mechanism which it claims embodies Mãori values and preferences. This article contends, however, that the type of ‘justice’ embodied in customary mechanisms, has often been taken out of context, and rendered universal and ahistorical through its representation as restorative justice mechanisms. Using fieldwork evidence, an analytical comparison between principles of restorative practices, New Zealand’s FGCs and the Mãori approach to justice was conducted. It concludes that this tendency to equate restorative justice with Indigenous approaches to law and justice is harmful and dangerous for it risks rendering the scholarship homogenizing and universalizing restorative justice, to the detriment of local preferences and practices.     

Contesting policy that undermines restorative justice for victims of crime☆

A policy provision in the Criminal Victim Assistance Program in British Columbia excludes the offender from participating in restorative justice approaches with the victim (and other affected parties) during counseling. A historical analysis of victim responses to crime shows that the victim experience to crime is socially constructed. In this regard, this policy act that excludes offenders from the victim healing process is consistent with a traditional approach to justice, which understands the offender to have committed a crime against the state, not the victim; however, separating the offender from the healing process is problematic within a restorative framework of justice where relationality is a central premise. Using a restorative lens, this policy act is contrary to an accompanying statute that has explicit provisions for counseling support for crime victims, as well as other statutes that provide for restorative responses to crime in Canada. The way we counsel and support victims from the harms created by crime cannot be separated from our view of justice.     

Personal and Political Reconciliation in Post-Genocide Rwanda

The majority of scholarly research on Rwanda currently focuses on determining the causes of and participation in the genocide. In this paper, we explore a variety of questions that have come to the forefront in post-genocide Rwanda. In particular, we are concerned with the prospects for peace and justice in the aftermath of the gross abuses of human rights that occurred and, to that end, we consider the potential uses and limits of restorative justice initiatives in the process of healing and reconciliation in Rwanda. We argue that restorative justice initiatives have moved the country closer toward reconciliation than retributive measures, such as the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. That said, we also suggest that the Rwandan government, despite claims that it seeks to achieve reconciliation, has not shown a serious commitment to healing the wounds that persist between either individual Rwandans or the groups that they comprise. In the end, then, we make a case for the importance of pairing a comprehensive search for justice in Rwanda with a commitment to truth-telling and accountability by the victims and perpetrators of the genocide, as well as by current government officials.     

Paradigm Muddle: The Threat to Restorative Justice Posed by Its Merger with Community Justice

The restorative justice movement has great potential to reform the way society responds to crime and wrongdoing. One might logically assume that the greatest challenge to the new restorative justice paradigm is the traditional punitive criminal justice paradigm itself. A more immediate threat, however, is posed by merging community justice, another approach to reforming the justice system, with restorative justice. Community justice has superficial similarities to restorative justice but relies on the underlying authoritarian assumptions of the existing criminal justice system and on processes that exclude most of those individuals directly affected by the offense. This paper clarifies and contrasts the key elements of both the restorative justice and the community justice paradigms and explains the threat to restorative justice posed by combining and confusing the two.     

Transforming Teens: Measuring the Effects of Restorative Justice Principles in a Teen Court Setting

This paper examines the impact of restorative justice principles in a teen court setting. Specifically, our research attempts to quantitatively measure learning of certain restorative justice principles through the teen court process by comparing matched, pre‐ and post‐survey responses to questions involving the adolescent's ability to understand their crime as a violation of relationships within their community, as opposed to merely a violation of law. Qualitative responses regarding the efficacy of the teen court program from both teen participants and their parents are also examined in the context of restorative justice principles. Finally, the efficacy of the teen court model is discussed in terms of recidivism rates compared to teens who do not experience the teen court process.     

Where Do They Belong? Giving Victims a Place in the Criminal Justice Process

Historically, victims once had an active participatory role in the criminal justice process and were responsible for not only initiating but also for prosecuting offenders. In common law countries, victims were gradually sidelined and by the 20th century, their role was reduced to that of a witness to a crime against the state. The exclusion of victims from the criminal justice process is a major source of dissatisfaction for victims as many of them want to participate in the criminal justice process. This has fuelled initiatives with restorative justice that claim to more fully include victims than conventional criminal justice. This paper examines three different approaches found in the literature on how to let victims participate. One view is that victims should leave the criminal justice system and that criminal justice should be replaced by alternative, restorative justice schemes in which victims are granted full recognition and respect for their dignity. A second approach is to integrate restorative practices such as victim-offender mediation in the criminal justice process. The third approach is to integrate victim participation and respect (so-called restorative values) in the criminal justice system. These three approaches are discussed and compared with one another. The paper closes with recommendations for criminal law reform.     

恢复性司法与中国传统社会关系考证

虽然中国传统社会与恢复性司法两者都倡导仁爱待人、和谐相处,提倡采用调解等非正式的手段化解矛盾冲突,但却有本质的不同:恢复性司法建立于平等、尊重的基础之上,以权利为本位,以法为据,保障当事人的合法权益;而中国传统社会却建立于“爱有差等”的等级观念之上,以义务为本位,侵蚀权利,维护封建统治。     

Engaging students on the topic of restorative justice and serious offenses

Within contemporary society, there is a prevailing sentiment that our criminal justice system leaves much to be desired in its responses to the offender, the victim, and the community. As a potential answer to these conceded shortcomings, restorative justice has earned significant recognition and consideration. While restorative justice principles and programs have received increasing support, for many individuals this is limited to cases involving relatively ‘minor,’ first time, and/or juvenile offenses. When it comes to situations with more ‘serious’ and violent offenses, acceptance of restorative responses dissipates. Gaining broader acceptance can be particularly challenging with current college students. With many students raised in the ‘get tough on crime’ era, embracing this alternative approach to serious crimes can be a difficult paradigm shift. This article will provide a framework for approaching the feasibility of applying restorative justice with serious offenses in the college course. In addition, suggestions for readings, projects, and assignments that will further assist in effectively engaging students with these issues will be provided.     

Teaching restorative justice: developing a restorative andragogy for face-to-face,online and hybrid course modalities

Teaching restorative justice in an academic setting is different from teaching almost any other academic course. Courses taught in the context of academic criminal justice programs tend to reinforce the structural inequalities in society, replicated and reinforced by instructor driven classroom experiences. In contrast, effective teaching of restorative justice should emulate the values of principles of restorative justice in the organization and management of the course. Teachers of restorative justice must ‘walk the talk’ and apply restorative principles and values to the design and delivery of the course itself. A conceptual framework for ‘restorative andragogy’ is developed that blends principles and values of adult learning with those of restorative justice. Four principles of this approach are identified and applied across three instructional modalities – face-to-face, online only, and hybrid courses. This approach provides a theoretically grounded model for effective teaching of restorative justice courses.